Vol. 496 No. 6
32 Mr. Finucane asked the Minister for Finance the steps, if any, he is taking to ensure that there are no leaks of budgetary matters in advance of his speech to Dáil Éireann; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23694/98]
The Deputy will be aware that following the budget leaks in 1995, an investigation was instigated and the report of that investigation was laid before the House in June 1995. Following that report, my Department issued an internal circular on 19 September 1995, which was copied to other relevant Departments. This circular effectively implemented the recommendations of the report.
In the run up to the budget each year, the Secretary General of my Department writes to the Secretaries General of other relevant Departments reminding them of the need for secrecy in relation to details of the budget.
Is the Minister satisfied there were no leaks of the Estimates? Prior to their announcement, we were advised that there would be substantial increases in funding for primary education, for example, and for other Departments. How can he reconcile that with his policy on the budget? Are there two different policies for the Estimates and the budget?
There is only one policy to which I strictly adhere in matters related to the Department of Finance, as people discovered in the run up to last year's budget. The premature disclosure of information before the Government makes a decision on it or before the appropriate time is not helpful.
One cannot guard against nor should one have difficulties with speculation in a variety of areas. That has occurred for many years. However, in the run up to last year's budget I was criticised for the lack of information that was made available. Budgetary matters should be treated this way. I am aware there has been speculation about a variety of issues relating to the Estimates for a considerable number of months. Most of it was a good deal wide of the mark. However, I am certain none of the speculation emanated from the Department of Finance.
This pre-budget secrecy is unjustifiable and antiquated. It is bizarre that a Minister would attempt to justify it in the 1990s. With the exception of one or two decisions in last year's budget, there was nothing in it that could not and should not have been properly discussed in committee and elsewhere in the House for some weeks before the Budget Statement was made. What justification can there be for maintaining the tradition of budget secrecy? Would the Minister agree that it is merely an excuse for Ministers for Finance to avoid engaging in debate and justification of their policies until they make the statement in the House?
The Deputy and I probably agree on a number of matters of public policy but this is one on which we have a fundamental disagreement. I am probably in disagreement with many Members on both sides of the House in this regard. Matters related to budgetary policy should not be leaked in advance. I have always held that view.
Why?
How is one to decide which item can be leaked or discussed and know it will not cause damage or will cause little damage?. The easiest way to deal with this is to have no leaks prior to the Budget Statement. Many reasons for this policy have been put forward and I can put forward a number of others.
The leaking of information could have an extremely adverse effect on the financial interests of the State——
That is absolute nonsense.
It could also compromise the ability of the Government to manage the national economy or——
That script was written in the 1960s. It is nonsense.
——it could result in an unwarranted benefit to individuals. The amount of speculation before the Budget Statements of the last Administration was such that the budget was well known before the Minister stood to speak in the House. For a number of years before that, there had been an increasing amount of budgetary information in the public domain before the Budget Statement was made in the House but it reached a ridiculous stage during the last Administration.
That is not the appropriate way to do financial business. I have held that view for many years and it will not change during my term of office. It is one of my strong beliefs.
While I accept that the Minister holds this belief, his only justification for it is the trite nonsense the Department has been peddling for several decades. It is clearly out of date.
I do not suggest that there should be speculation based on leaks. However, would it be more appropriate if proper presentations were made of the Estimates, since they are probably the more important part of the budget package——
Agreed.
——and of some of the taxation changes being contemplated? Could these presentations be made to a committee of the House in advance of the Budget Statement?
The Minister referred to the leaks of the Estimates as wild speculation in the newspapers.
Some of it was.
The Irish Independent article on the question of primary education, which I welcomed, was accurate. The Minister should try to trace the source of that leak.
Overall I would agree with the Minister. I would have to disagree with my colleague, Deputy McDowell. It is important that the budget should remain a secret until the Minister announces it here. It gives it more credibility. This is especially the case if there is an increase in the price of petrol, for example. If the Minister signalled that beforehand, we would all be queuing up to get petrol before the price increase. People would be hoarding it. There was an occurrence of that as regards cross-Border trade a few years ago where there was speculation. I am sure the Minister will confirm that this element of secrecy will continue to surround the budget in the future while he is Minister.
I certainly will endeavour to continue it. I intend to adopt the same procedure which I adopted for last year's budget. I will try to guard against leaks as best I can.
The question Deputy McDowell raised with regard to the debating beforehand of the Estimates and possible taxation measures is a separate matter altogether. If the Members of Dáil Éireann decide in the future that the Estimates process and the taxation measures of the budget are to be done in a different way or format as applies in other member states, then that would put a different complexion on this. As it is at present, it is important that this information be kept until budget day. Deputy McDowell and I will have to disagree about this.
May I take it then if I were to propose to the Select Committee on Finance and the Public Service that we might look at ways in which the Estimates could be debated in advance of their announcement, that the Minister would support giving the opportunity to a committee to look at it?
That is a matter to which I must give further consideration. What I said was that if the Members of Dáil Éireann decided on another way of doing the Estimates, the Minister for Finance would abide by it. Personally I see nothing wrong with the methods which we apply at present. They work quite well. Over the past years with the growth of the committee system there has been considerably more in-depth analysis and debate given to all the Estimates. That has been a good thing.
When the money is already spent.
I do not see much merit in going further down that road. However, if the House in years to come was to decide on different ways of doing it, I would have to abide by it.
